Nope got about 86 games I’m currently enjoying. Kick rocks

Indeed, what they need is a big incentive for people to get the Scorpio. Imo, that would be a game that explicitly shows the difference between an xb1 vs a Scorpio. It would be hard to show 4k to those watching from home at 1080p + compression ala youtube.

Imagine CD3 destruction running on a Jag vs an 8 core Zen. 10 buildings being blown apart at 20fps (if that) vs 50+ at 60fps or more. That’s something that could easily demonstrate the difference.

I know people wouldn’t be thrilled about the higher price tag, but if the HW supports than I don’t have a problem, actually that, to me personally, would be what would define the denomination of it being a “beast” of a console. If your pushing with native 4k than be sure it won’t come back to bite you, otherwise you can expect another 2013 e3. After the Scorpio documents leaks you already have people bashing MS for their arrogance towards checker boarding when their proposing devs do similar things – which is why 4k PR is currently not a good plan if they go with low end specs inside the HW.

And why if they want to deliver on native 4k as they’ve been promising, I would like to see them pushing the envelope, if Sony (well Cerney) was saying they used Vega tech in the pro, when Vega is still “tbd” … why couldn’t MS go and use some Navi based solutions? Spencer also stated that he doesn’t want half-steps and the comment from the Ori dev (yes a 2nd party dev, but still) could indicate that the Scorpio is in fact based on modern archs (hopefully) and possibly taking some design aspects/solutions from future archs.

That is all wishful thinking, but I would personally like to see devs go with 1440p@60fps and use the remaining resources for better overall visuals, AI, physics, no (or as minimal as possible) loading times etc.

BTW another important factor when talking about a balanced design. Considering the CU count in the xb1 and the reasoning behind them OC the GPU instead of unlocking the redundant CUs, if they go with – as speculated by EG – 56/60CUs, how exactly is a Jag going to feed that than?!

Thanks, you made good points people need to consider. Slapping a Polaris chip on a Celeron isn’t going to get you very far. LOL. We both noticed MS has been pushing “balanced” since XB1 launched and that further implies that Scorpio will not have some lopsided APU.

Honestly, for every person who posts an honest assessment of Scorpio’s outlook or likely configuration, there are 3-5 who just post what they wish would happen. Seems many wish not be left behind or their console shown up, be it XB1 or PS4.

All we can do is take what we know about Scorpio and the state of the hardware/software industry, and make an educated guess. Personally, I’d like to see some under-clocked Ryzen/Vega tech, or some other hybrid of modern AMD technologies. Scorpio needs to be the top XB1 for 3-4 years to make sense.

A $500 or $600 price tag for is OK with me, personally, if the hardware supports it. Scorpio could come in cheaper because of cost or to better compete. Microsoft could take a calculated hit on it for a year, who knows? There certainly is precedent. They need to strongly pursue attractive games and get the standard XB1 down to $150-$200 next Christmas. The Scorpio can slide into the XB1 position over the next few years.

does your xbox one suck that bad?

People that argue that a jag is enough don’t consider the advancements in AI, physics, damage calculations, collision detection … and other CPU related tasks. Just pushing 4k strains the GPU considerably, so the GPGPU isn’t going to help much when your GPU is already doing all it can which results in a bottleneck because of the old tablet CPU.

And yet they think a Jag based APU from 2012 is going to be fine in 2018 and after? So if the ps5 ends up with the same jag no one will say anything as well … right?!

The best example is the pro where even on today’s demanding games it does barely 30fps@1080p let alone 4k – even though the jag inside the pro was considerably OC-ed. What happens when even more demanding games based on a more complex code/engines are introduced? Devs aren’t going to stop pushing the envelope when it comes to gfx, even more so on AI (especially with all the AI talk floating around) so it won’t take long before the GPU is being tasked as much as it can. Which will result in either lower fps, resolution or a combination of the two – something will have to give – and a lot of optimization (aka downgrade) if the previous options aren’t enough – which is the case with the PRO.

Imo, If they (MS) want to play it moderately safe they should put a better CPU in there and not just relay on the GPU … then there’s the whole “balanced” thing MS has stated multiple times, so I presume they wouldn’t go and put a desktop class, possibly Vega based GPU, with a tablet CPU (even at higher clocks).

Btw the Volta based GPUs are supposedly coming this year, but well, delays happen. And also I’m still of the opinion that 4k is too early of a consideration even on PCs, let alone on consoles. I would have advised against it being used as PR material as there is barely any guarantee what devs could decide to do with given resources, even tough as shown with the ps4 (and the pro to an extent) originally resolution is an effective PR strategy.

It’s OK, slaphead, it gives you something to do while you wait for a game to show up on your VCR.

Have fun being a troll.

Don’t worry little one, everyone here laughs at you for all your dumb comments.

Have fun waiting a few more years.